Accidental War

The most recent rantings of the outgoing President Obama with his forcing a good amount of Russians out of the country Here is a petty skirmish that up to now Putin has not responded to, making him look like the hero, and Obama childish.

Considering that for the last couple of days the talk has been of the so called attacks on the US Power grid by Russians which they are supposed to have been hacked and has been the center of an article in Info Wars here

The good old warrior that should know better is John McCain who says “There has to be a price to pay” Here  This man who, actually was tortured and perhaps, has a clear insight as to war and its repercussions all the more questionable.

We should treat with care accusing other governments of doing anything at all. In yesteryear because the honesty and integrity were primary values together with loss of face locally such antics would have led to war.

Today what do the Russians have to say? They laugh it off as an addendum to all the nonsense of the Hillary / Trump election ‘Non News’ and most of it Fake!

There have been so many reactions, (and many violent) to fake news that the lesser informed believe, and worse still….act on.

Here for example:-

This fake news is still believed today, Brown to Trayvon Martin in order to put people that have committed no crime other than being white, on the defensive.

The trouble is of course that on a local scale its bad, but on the global scale when involving other countries it is so much worse.

But could it lead to war? well if you consider for instance the US war of Independence by all counts was started by a mistaken shot as the British soldiers came upon Lexington, it seems that such an act could occur again if the social media promote a false stance.

Practically any infraction is taken up by the bloggers who make money off such sensationalist news. Who’s sole purpose is not to verify news, but merely to exploit it.

When its comes to other countries that have a similar amount of fire power as you, it may be wise for Obama not to do the ritualistic sign of chest beating, because most have evolved past that by a long way.

Are We Too Sensitive?

The most recent meltdowns have occurred in the far right wing liberals, and manifests itself in SJ Warriors that collapsed in tears believing Armageddon is soon to follow, and all that has been done is a new President elected.

We want to abolish death penalties, food shortages, emphasize civil rights, gay rights, non identifying gender rights, refugee rights, black rights, flag rights, human rights, and the list goes on!

But are we trying to insulate ourselves from pain the wrong way? Is pain actually acceptable at all, a natural occurrence that cannot be escaped?.

I can actually remember as a child watching flames flicker on an open fire. I also remember my mothers stern warning never to remove the guard, I also remember actually burning my fingers, because I disregarded her advice. (Butter and lots of kisses helped).

When I was a carpenters apprentice it took a very short period of time to understand that to miss when hammering a nail………caused a pain second to none.

The abolition of death penalties in most countries have used the pain as part of the argument as to why it should be abolished, as well as the error factor that cannot be reversed. But cruel and painful punishment comes up the most!

Not only do we want pain negated, we also want implied or anticipated pain eradicated. Even assumed pain is a target for those that wish to balance society.

If I think you do not treat me as an equal, observe my rights, allow me freedoms of thought, are not sympathetic with my circumstance,…… are all my perceived thoughts and……….. today’s social warriors want to eradicate that thought too!

Pain is a necessary evil and it could be questioned that we should not suffer it.

The International Association for the Study of Pain‘s widely used definition states: “Pain is an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage, or described in terms of such damage.”

They go further to state:-

Pain motivates the individual to withdraw from damaging situations, to protect a damaged body part while it heals, and to avoid similar experiences in the future.

Without the pain…you will not withdraw and no amount of warnings will help. That pain is cold, heartless, and absolute!

You need pain to ensure you survive by trying not to make the same mistake again. It teaches you to avoid the circumstance in future (I wont let THAT happen again!)

In relationships you can correct your choices by another partner . In loyalties you can focus on a better candidate. In your social life you can join a like minded group instead of trying to convince some…. that only cause friction…..and PAIN!

Instead of correcting pain we should look at prevention rather than cure, chose our friends and allegiance with care. Flow with the scheme of things because just as a river…. no matter what we do it wont flow with us.

If we are faced with pain we need to be helped to learn how to deal with the pain, not try to eradicate that pain which, may be done on a smaller artificial scale, but in the world of reality there will always be pain.

From childbirth to the dentist, from the loss of a loved one, to that prized possession that we thought so much of and to that love that we once had….. and lost.

Like all things that effect us we can either see it as a defeat or a learning experience that we can take something useful from it.

Perhaps one of those things may be to make sure it never happens again!


Fake News

As Hillary is taken to book by her sponsors who quite rightly ask….”What went wrong” and considering they put in upwards of one BILLION dollars into the farce that occurred around four weeks ago, perhaps they most of all, have THAT right to ask.

It seems all and sundry are getting on the Band Wagon with the latest on the emails that were leaked by John Podesta, (accidentally) on bad advice of his IT guy.

It now is apparent to many Democrats the Russians were the bad guys that (depending on which stories you read) were in cahoots with Julian Assange of Wikileaks, or perhaps the Russians directly hacked because of a you kid in Russia that was testing the system to see how far it would go, and of course there is….. so many options….. and all to cover the tracks of actually giving the truth to the people.

This TRUTH is totally disregarded and like the messenger that brought the news of Lucculus coming for war…… Tigranes had his head cut off, the democrats refuse to believe the information was the cause of the astounding loss of the Democrats, not some obscure leak from the Russians, but their own foolishness.

Now anyone that actually took the time to watch all of the election news could see the chronic bias at every turn. Most people took to calling CNN the Clinton News Network, because they resolutely refused to print anything bad.

The Washington Post to the NY Times…. were all instrumental in this charade.

The President has for the last couple of days given in to the nonsense of hacking and not even HE can provide a tiny bit of evidence to prove that case. In fact he has been challenged by Putin to produce some evidence or shut up about the issue.

Although farcical in its suggestions, many have used this excuse for the huge loss that was visited to the Democrats, and wail about the need to do something about it.

Zuckerberg has been the first to actually say he is making adjustments to Facebook, by adding in fact checkers to monitor these fake news messages that cost Hillary the election. It seems that HIS fact checkers are to be Snopes and ABC and well, well, well, who were both firing off false news and suppressing negative Hillary news throughout the election.

So we have fact checkers from organizations that claim to be non partisan and I guess have changed their spots.

I believe that Zuckeberg (who already had his space reserved in the Democratic party anticipating the win) has aspirations of politics. To put more of the same liberal nonsense that we have been hearing about so much over the last year, to us because the guy actually believes the nonsense that he preachers.

My own view is that Facebook WILL collapse about as fast as it was created. What they intend doing is being the judge and jury for propaganda and effectively will censor what all write.

The really scary thing is slowly and surely your rights….OUR rights are getting eaten away by some that think they know better.

Listen to this nonsensical argument………….

And when these misstatements are not enough to tell you that there is fake news out there Tucker is on the front line pushing back…………..

Here we see the gall to decide who the elector can vote for on the basis they know better than the voter.

But the founding fathers did not make a stipulation of acumen for holding public office…only that they be chosen BY the PEOPLE.




Are Politicians too extreme?

Here is one of so many examples of Pundits getting it so badly wrong.

Donald Trump has confounded so many that supposedly know about politics.

Polls coming out of your ears, and Hollywood liberal leftists having to backtrack on on their promises to emigrate, and even Obama ridiculed Trump as to whether he would even get near to the Presidency.

Whats interesting is that everything they threw at Trump……… he seemed to take advantage of.

I would offer that these are run of the mill political ideals are so far from reality and those that promote those ideas, have no idea what the voter really wants.

Both the UK with Brexit and the USA with Trump have had a drastic and (to them) unpredictable  resounding no from their voters.

But what does the future hold for our new breed of politicians?

Firstly their breed of politics may actually be dead and they simply do not know it yet.

Their supporters are those that have seen so little hardship, have utilized Facebook and Twitter to rally their minority that care so much about social issues and take their unsupported mandate to ever higher levels.

If your not campaigning against something..anything you are not considered to be ‘real’ among your peers. If you cannot be ‘active’ you are not deemed to be ‘inclusive’

Real argument does not matter. If there is no argument they will create one. Take this next little snippet that conveniently makes us all demons…… if you have ONE basic characteristic.


You just have to be in the majority ANYTHING and therefore are biased toward the minority…….. Go figure…..

It would seem that millennials without a cause are nothing. if you dont have a cause….. go out and create one…

Secondly and perhaps more importantly is while some are demonstrating, others are working on the problem.

Without even been inaugurated, Trump is getting off his butt and making jobs. Big companies seeing their bottom line, (and in turn their bonuses) are going to dwindle are now coming to his way of thinking and wanting to be part of this new era.

This is what is going to ensure Trumps success his 2nd term in office and his daughter becoming the first female President of the USA.

It seems that the millennials will need another cause to fight for because they will have ever more dwindling support for their case against Trump.

It hard to flunk a success story!

Commander in Chief

With the current Syrian crisis turning on its head at the moment it may be a good idea to turn to the position of the Commander in Chief who is somewhat removed from war,  its implications and certainly its effects of which he is insulated.

There are certain issues that apply to the different classes. Lets for arguments sake say we have class 1, 2, and 3.

For instance if your an officer (1)  the command you have makes the likelihood of you needing to go into battle, that privilege is given to ranks 2 and 3 who being more prevalent and expendable are more suited to the role. Role 2 maybe looked at as say… a Sergeant Major who simply leads the front liners (3) into the actual combat.

When in civilian life, we have a similar structure, the upper class (1), Middle class (2) and the lower class (3) and (1) is far removed from the issues that involve (2) and those far removed from the position of (3).

They know each other are there and respect their position, but there are advantages as you go up the social scale as to what may or may not be achieved.

A few hundred years back it was necessary to do things a slightly different way………

The Charge of the Light Brigade

was a charge of British light cavalry led by Lord Cardigan against Russian forces during the Battle of Balaclava on 25 October 1854 in the Crimean War.


Civil War: Gettysburg and Pickett’s Charge

Despite the deadly fire, one of Pickett’s brigade leaders Gen. Lewis Armistead still managed to cross the field and lead 100 soldiers over a stone wall to create a breach in the Union line, shouting “Come forward, Virginians! Come on, boys, we must give them the cold steel! Who will follow me?”


“She was huge of frame, terrifying of aspect, and with a harsh voice. A great mass of bright red hair fell to her knees: She wore a great twisted golden necklace, and a tunic of many colors, over which was a thick mantle, fastened by a brooch. Now she grasped a spear, to strike fear into all who watched her……”

-Dio Cassius

Wealthy men in the Roman Empire often led the charges against enemies, they, had the most to gain and the most to lose when faced with adversaries.

In those days it was customary to lead the charge if you were in command. All influential Lords and wealthy commanders led in battle, firstly to protect their interest and secondly to rally the men……..If he was not at the front…. NO man would fight!

I would make the proposition that, we need to take the clock back a little, and get real. We hear so many calling for war and none of them prepared to lead the charge.

Although war is a little more covert with autonomous subs, and drones that can be flown from many miles away, the consequence is no less than it was a thousand years ago for those being attacked.

The trouble with this scenario is that the leader may take men into battle for frivolous reasons.If you have a might second to none its easy to strike and easy to explain with countless reasons as to why you had to use draconian means.

No one argues with history, and history is written by the victor.

The answer is clear and the moral is simple. If the war that you propose is sufficient that YOU would lead the charge and be possibly the first to die from the consequence, then it passes the litmus test for your support.

But if your gonna push the next guy to lead that first man over the hill charge, you have neither the right nor the moral compass to be called a leader and declare a war!

Black Privilege

To my knowledge there is no such thing as ‘Black Privilege’ and, as previously,  I put forward on argument on that of White Privilege it seems only reasonable that I should examine the converse side of the coin and for it too…. consider the Litmus Test.

There are few examples that can be fair comparison to examine this aspect of privilege and to whether or not it exists. What we can do is examine “White privilege’ and apply the same rules to decide whether or not there is actually a case for it.

Perhaps we ought look no further than countries that are controlled solely by blacks, or at least have a black head of state.

The first and most obvious must be Barack Obama. To all intended purposes referred to as the first black president of the USA. In 2004 he steam rolled to the White House with his eloquent acumen that has not been so apparent to me since MLK or JFK.

Indeed I saw Obama on his first stage appearance with 13 others where I boldly decided that he WILL be the next US President… why? because when asked “Would you talk with heads of states of the “axis of evil”(Iran, N Korea, Syria) He was the only one of 14 to answer in the affirmative. (I firmly believe you have to talk otherwise wars start).

I, sadly, was very wrong in my estimation. Oh yes, he became President, but did he act out his words?…no he did not.

His track record is nothing short of abysmal, taking the US into such debt that it will take monumental effort to even get back to the debt before his inauguration.

He leaves a huge divide between the poor and the rich, between peoples and races that, he appeared to make no attempt to balance the one sidedness that has been the nucleus of his tenancy of the WH.

Its as if he deliberately in any way he could push a wedge into the American people. With about a GDP of around 1.55% as compared to say, China of around 8%, has something to be desired.

As another example we may consider Zimbabwe. To be correct the Republic of Zimbabwe that used to be Rhodesia which was created by Cecil Rhodes and inherited by Robert Mugabe in 1980 as Prime Minister and President in 1987, and still is.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu has called him “a cartoon figure of an archetypal African dictator.”

Between 1982 and 1985 at least 20,000 people died in ethnic cleansing and were buried in mass graves. Mugabe consolidated his power in December 1987, when he was declared executive president by parliament, combining the roles of head of state, head of government, and commander-in-chief of the armed forces, with powers to dissolve parliament and declare martial law.

During the 1980s Mugabe’s policies were largely socialist in orientation. In 1980 and 1981 the Zimbabwean economy showed strong growth of the GDP with 10.6% and 12.5%. From 1982–89 economic growth averaged just 2.7% (1980–89 average 4.47%). The white minority government maintained (with economic sanctions) from 1966–72 a 6.7% average growth rate and overall from 1966 till 1979 a 3.8% average growth rate.

Unsuccessful market reform attempts were started in the 1990s and the economy stagnated in this time. Since 2000, GDP has declined by roughly 40% in part due to land reform and hyperinflation.

These to examples are perhaps in the extreme but they do reflect the typical Black leaders of which there are many examples.

The Five Worst Leaders In Africa.


To name but a few in the history of Africa, where once elected, the leaders consolidate their base and eliminate any rival. The enrich themselves beyond any natural expectation, and have zero tolerance to logic or empathy for any that get in their way.

The transition to their power has been fairly straight forward, with a relatively small amount of bloodshed in the transition of white to black, but subsequent deaths come in their hundreds of thousands while they consolidate their power.

The aim here is not to make a comparison with how an incoming black leader compares to the resident white leader. The intent is to see how the black leaders enriches themselves, eliminates thousands and rule with a dictatorship second to none.

In addition blacks that faced transportation to the new world actually met a future better than blacks of today can expect in their ancestral homeland. Poverty is rampant, living conditions abysmal and as a whole Africa has little future to be looking forward to. No vote no rights, and no future.

The point of bringing this to the readers attention is that you would expect it to be different. Perhaps a much higher standard of living nationwide with black leaders. Perhaps you would expect more liberal stances and freedom of expression, income, education and civil rights.

But under black leaders you have very little of any of these basic human rights, and the same civil rights all blacks enjoy all over the world except in their country of origin.

So if this is correct, the privilege that blacks want to enjoy on the backs of whites I would say is unearned acumen…. because you dont have to undure what other black endure in your great, great grandfathers homeland.

It Passes the litmus test!


Our Governments are so Benevolent

In Europe we see so many in government that are ready to accept refugees on our part. From Angela Merkel to the left wing socialist Groups in the UK, all believing that refugees need help and that we should provide it.

Portugal has offered to host 10,000 of the refugees who’ve landed on Europe’s shores from the globe’s war-torn zones. So far, it has taken in 234. (Here)

A newly-registered German NGO wants to transport refugees from North Africa and the Middle East into Europe via planes instead of highly dangerous sea routes. Organizers plan to raise money for plane tickets and amend an EU directive that fines airlines for ferrying migrants.(Here)

Some countries in the EU are readying to bully other European nations that refuse to accept refugees from the Middle East and North Africa

If two-thirds of the EU members agree, a proposal from the European Commission would institute a 250,000 euro fine  ($285,000 USD) on countries who refuse asylum seekers from the Middle East and North Africa who are coming from one European country to another.(here)

BRUSSELS—Europe expects more help from the U.S. and Canada on refugees as it struggles with a rise in populism and xenophobia, a senior European Union official said, as the world’s leaders gather in New York for the United Nations General Assembly. (Here)

Personally I would question the legality of politicians inviting refugees into the country under laws which they themselves made, but were not elected on those terms.

A Government is there to run the country, and not to hand out favors to whom they chose, which, is described so much better than I could by Davy Crocket  (Here)

I believe too that Governments overreach themselves when you stop to consider welfare of any sort. They hold the purse-strings on behalf of the people, not their own slush funds.